If I asked one of my Indigenous friends about their identity, their answer would likely be what nation and place they belong to and who their grandparents were or what clan or house they were from. (Except for those separated from their ancestry by colonialism.)
How much is it an age thing? I am aware of growing up in an era before the internet, almost before television - 12 inch screen, 405 line monochrome and single channel. I remember coal fires and outside lavatories. If visiting grandparents, no electricity or running water.
I've adapted to technology - heck, I even had a career in IT. But a bit of me sees me as a post-apocalyptic crone making bannocks over an open fire on a repurposed hubcap.
If I asked one of my Indigenous friends about their identity, their answer would likely be what nation and place they belong to and who their grandparents were or what clan or house they were from. (Except for those separated from their ancestry by colonialism.)
There have been a few very sad cases here concerning the proper burial place, with disputing parties resorting to the white justice system. One such case was determined late last year in the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, a dispute between the mother of a 15 year old youth and his aunt. His mother was going through some hard times and gave her then infant son to her sister to care for. They were of the Tiwi people. The young fellow died, and his aunt arranged for a Christian church service, with a Tiwi burial in Darwin. The mother wanted the funeral to happen on Tiwi Island, with the necessary Tiwi service at the burial and another at the next Dry Season. Ultimately, the trial court and then on the appeal, found in favour of the aunt. (see Puruntatameri v Baird [2020] NTCA 12).
There was another case earlier this year in NSW. The deceased in this case was an adult and the question was whether he was to be buried in accordance with his sister's wishes on Weilwan land at Gulargambone, or on Gumbaynggirr land near Bowraville. Both are within NSW but the road journey between them is about 750 km. For 15 or more years, the deceased had lived with his partner at Bowraville, and they'd had 4 children together. Evidence at the hearing from a Gumbaynggirr elder was that:
“A person who is adopted into Gumbaynggirr society can be buried in Gumbaynggirr country. We would want a person who was Gumbaynggirr to be buried on Gumbaynggirr country, including if they are adopted by the tribe. If I went to someone else’s country to marry, I would be expected to follow their law and custom. The Deceased followed our customs, so it is right that he should be buried in Bowraville.”
“If the old spirits of this country had not wanted him to be here they would have moved him. They would have given him an uncomfortable feeling so that he would not have felt right here. I have felt this feeling myself outside my country – that I have to go home. The Deceased was at home in Gumbaynggirr country”.
The court ruled in favour of the partner rather than the sister (see Darcy v Duckett [2016] NSWSC 1756)
Both very sad cases and there are more in the same vein.
Thinking about what @Firenze says brought me back to the impact of social media on questions of identity. I joined Facebook in about 2012 to stay in touch with family overseas and have found it a tricky place to negotiate, don't encourage any debates or post controversial topics, zap off anti-vaxxers or conspiracy theorists.
During the Covid lockdown though it has become an important way to stay in touch with people I no longer see at church or who can't travel. Last week a friend called and asked me to go around and taste some home-made cheeses for her because she has had Long-Covid and after five months still has no sense of smell or taste. This is someone who always posts upbeat and positive content, has a large Instagram following for her home-crafts and recipes.
When we met, masked and keeping a distance, I was shocked to find out how ill she has been. She has lost a great deal of weight, has poor balance, rashes and blurry vision, heart palpitations. Her small business making goats-milk cheeses has fallen apart.
How many of us have an 'as-if' persona online or on social media? Generational differences are IMO more of a factor than location or culture. My niece in her 20s rarely gives any details about her private life but has no trouble posting endless revealing selfies -- I'd recognise her sculpted eyebrows and tattooed nipples anywhere but haven't a clue what she is reading or watching. Those of us who grew up writing letters, blogging or emailing tend to use social media to share interests or find others who like the things we do. Finding support or holding conversations is harder because of privacy concerns and yet some posters seem to find a comfortable balance. Twitter with its volatile mob mentality is another story.
Sometimes I miss waiting weeks for a handwritten long newsy letter only meant for a single recipient.
@GeeD, I wonder if you're aware of the work of the Missing Person Task Force in southern Africa? It's headed by Madeleine Fullard who worked closely with Claudia Bisso, an Argentinian forensic archeologist experienced in finding and identifying the bodies of murdered or disappeared activists worldwide. In South Africa, the Team investigate those activists who went missing between 1960 and 1994 and have so far recovered 150 bodies. Once identified through DNA, the bodies are returned to their families for burial.
This project has a very dark history but has been one of the most healing and positive projects in South Africa. For many families, the not knowing what happened to a son, daughter, brother or sister leaves them stuck with terrible unanswered questions, imagining all kinds of unbearable scenarios and unable to move on. In recent years the search has become more urgent for those parents and grandparents determined to get resolution and an answer before they themselves die.
As Fullard pointed out: "What drives us in the Missing Persons Task Team is much more than recovering a body; it is about finding the remains of a life that mattered and handing them back to their family in a dignified, solemn and moving ceremony."
Well, you can't really disagree with my experience, as you don't know it. I'm talking about myself. Plus I wasn't saying close attention to detail prevents a sense of identity. I was specifically saying 'too much,' which is different from 'a lot', and which is personal to me and how my brain works. It's about how/whether detailed thinking interacts with big picture thinking and generalisations, which I'd say are pretty key to identity.
It was the "too much" that I was picking up on, not your experience. "Too much" necessarily connotes excess.
Yes, excess, but not in a vacuum - more often in comparison. It is quite a common thing for one to be so focused on details that one loses (or never develops) a sense of the big picture, particularly if one is autistic. Possibly something you've never experienced, but in that context, it is easily possible to be too focused on detail to get a sense of a whole, of a meaning or identity - not just with personal identity, but with all sorts of things.
Picking upon @MaryLouise's point about online persona - very true. My FB life is a highly edited version in which I only ever paint, knit and garden. Ironic really, since virtually all of what passes for my social life happens online. The number of RL interactions with friends in the average month I could count on the fingers of one hand and have digits to spare.
I wish - unreasonably - that some of my friends would make more personal posts, rather than only ones about organisations or causes.
But then I tend to hide or unfollow FB 'friends' who post selfies or social activities - and they are usually the younger ones; children of long-emigrated cousins, accepted out of vague familial guilt.
So, yes, I suspect there is a whole way of expressing - creating even - your identity online. A world in which the places you've been, the food you eat, your own body, are only real once photographed and posted.
I am now wondering about my online persona, and what that means. I tend to use FB partly as a journal, to express my thoughts about my experiences, and partly to post things to make people laugh or to have a discussion, to interact. And photos of the woods, and also of my drawings. I am not aware of a particular persona emerging - just me talking about things that interest me or amuse me or frustrate me or upset me.
I also prefer people to post personal posts, though I get that people each use FB very differently. Some people just post memes. I observe that some people like discussion on their posts, but others don't. I quite like when people post selfies, because I like drawing portraits, so I draw people's selfies, and they find it fun when I draw them. I occasionally post selfies, but normally a silly selfie when my hair is messy or when I've got soaked by the rain. I met a FB friend recently and she said I look much younger in real life than on FB, but I hadn't been aware of making myself look older.
I find for some people, the very fact that they don't do something that others do becomes a point of identity. I have become aware of this when people say they find people who don't have TVs irritating, and so then I ask why, as I also don't have a TV. For me, it is simply because when I had one I never watched it, so it seemed pointless for me to be paying a TV licence. But apparently some people talk about having no TV as if it's a thing that makes them unique or superior. Which I guess is a downside of identity, when people are looking for ways of portraying themselves as extra special, better than the norm, etc. It can become an ego thing for some, and also a prejudice thing. And then also can lead to misunderstanding if you are simply stating something because it's relevant, and people see it that you are boasting.
As Noel Coward said - 'Television is for appearing on, not looking at'.
Whether the remark was tongue-in-cheek or not, it neatly pins an aspect of class as an identity marker.
I think it still an important determinant, though probably not so strongly in my modest and provincial life. But nevertheless I have the signifiers of a middle class person - books, original paintings on the walls of my owned home, wines with dinners cooked from Nigella or Ottolenghi, a subscription to the LRB and a membership of the National Trust. All of it a long way from the lives of a farmer's daughter and a rural policeman.
fineline - I think that's right. Never having had TV is part of our identity. In our case, neither of us particularly likes it. On top of that, until we retired we preferred to spend what time we could have spent watching it talking to each other.
I find for some people, the very fact that they don't do something that others do becomes a point of identity. I have become aware of this when people say they find people who don't have TVs irritating, and so then I ask why, as I also don't have a TV. For me, it is simply because when I had one I never watched it, so it seemed pointless for me to be paying a TV licence. But apparently some people talk about having no TV as if it's a thing that makes them unique or superior. Which I guess is a downside of identity, when people are looking for ways of portraying themselves as extra special, better than the norm, etc. It can become an ego thing for some, and also a prejudice thing. And then also can lead to misunderstanding if you are simply stating something because it's relevant, and people see it that you are boasting.
What you describe earlier doing on FB, @fineline, has to do with adapting a form of media to suit your needs or interests, if I'm reading you right, and as I was looking at this it struck me I do use more private Facebook groups for NT theological study groups, book discussion groups, rare plant enthusiasts, and amateur genealogy discussion groups, all closed to the public so I can comment without having atheist Friends quiz me or cousins ask about family history searches. As you say, when I'm posting there I'm not suppressing my identity or assuming a persona, just talking to the likeminded.
The politics of how we use social media to present ourselves as sophisticated or culturally literate or having a social conscience etc is akin to the politics of food, lifestyle choices, travel bragging, thrift campaigns or political resistance. Most of us have contradictory and hard-to-explain combinations of motives about what doing X or Y says about us. A decade ago most people in southern Africa with access to mobile phones or the Internet would be considered exceptionally privileged or well educated. That's not so much the case now is that local educational institutes, workplaces and library facilities offer free wifi and often free or subsidised mobile phones or laptops. Most of those posting on the community websites where I live post images or memes rather than having to choose between languages, though this too is changing. Young people want to join the global conversations and belong to a wider world.
One of the most popular local FB groups came about under lockdown when people began posting pics of what they were cooking and this had no snobbery value at all -- most communities in southern Africa (though not in Zimbabwe where British food cast a damper on eating patterns) are long-standing proud indigenous or post-colonial food cultures. It's a big part of my life.
One of the most popular local FB groups came about under lockdown when people began posting pics of what they were cooking and this had no snobbery value at all -- most communities in southern Africa (though not in Zimbabwe where British food cast a damper on eating patterns) are long-standing proud indigenous or post-colonial food cultures. It's a big part of my life.
I basically agree with the parts of your post that I've deleted. I've kept this section, as you use the word "damper". I know the sense in which you use it, and that is a common usage here. But in older days, damper also meant a scone-like bread, one which could be made quickly by stockmen after they'd spent the day moving cattle that bit closer to market, and were setting up camp for the night. Knowing that is part of my identity, just as not knowing it will be part of the identity of someone 40 years younger.
One of the most popular local FB groups came about under lockdown when people began posting pics of what they were cooking and this had no snobbery value at all -- most communities in southern Africa (though not in Zimbabwe where British food cast a damper on eating patterns) are long-standing proud indigenous or post-colonial food cultures. It's a big part of my life.
I basically agree with the parts of your post that I've deleted. I've kept this section, s you use the word "damper". I know the sense in which you use it, and that is a common usage here. But in older days, damper also meant a scone-like bread, one which could be made quickly by stockmen after they'd spent the day moving cattle that bit closer to market, and were setting up camp for the night.
I do know that usage @GeeD, but thought the sense I was using it in was clear enough! What I'm addressing here is obviously separate from issues to do with food security or expropriated agricultural land, but it is something people talk about as a "legacy of stewed tea, burnt toast and cold porridge" in the former colonies of Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi. An old joke in my mother's family is that the Shona would have been much worse off under the Portuguese colonial state but at least everyone would know about peri-peri chicken and feijoada.
Oh, yes, your usage was perfectly clear. I just picked a word you'd used, and took another meaning of it to show part of my identity. How many meanings do you have for damper?
fineline - I think that's right. Never having had TV is part of our identity. In our case, neither of us particularly likes it. On top of that, until we retired we preferred to spend what time we could have spent watching it talking to each other.
Out of curiosity, how is it part of your identity, do you think? What specifically do you see it saying about you and defining you?
I'm curious because, for me, I don't see it as an identity thing, so I am wondering how people process something they don't do or have into becoming part of their self definition. Is it a point of pride, for instance? I see this with people who say they don't use ereaders - often it seems part of a self-definition of being old-fashioned and liking 'real' things, sometimes with a kind of suggestion that they have superior taste.
It says that we don't like television- and people know that we don't like it. They also know that we prefer live stage to film - live stage has demands that film does not and we enjoy seeing how producers and actors cope with those demands. Other than that, I have some problem understanding your post.
Here are some things I am wondering, regarding identity:
What is its purpose, both psychologically and socially?
Does it only exist as a comparative thing, comparing oneself to others, to find one's place among them?
To what extent are value judgements important for people's sense of identity - as in, a simple comparison could be 'I have blonde hair, which distinguishes me from people with brown hair, red hair, black hair, etc.', but a value judgement would be 'I have blonde hair which makes me better/worse than people who have other hair colours.' I give that as a bit of a silly example, but I'm thinking about the multiple things identity can involve, including life choices, moral decisions, etc.
I'm wondering whether identity is something that gives people a sense of purpose and worth, and whether for many people a sense of being better than others is necessary to keep them ... I don't know.... confident? mentally afloat? Just because so much of what I see on social media is people comparing themselves to others in all sorts of ways, and so often simple differences are seen as value judgments. It's something I've been wondering about for years.
What you describe earlier doing on FB, @fineline, has to do with adapting a form of media to suit your needs or interests, if I'm reading you right, and as I was looking at this it struck me I do use more private Facebook groups for NT theological study groups, book discussion groups, rare plant enthusiasts, and amateur genealogy discussion groups, all closed to the public so I can comment without having atheist Friends quiz me or cousins ask about family history searches. As you say, when I'm posting there I'm not suppressing my identity or assuming a persona, just talking to the likeminded.
Ah yes, that makes sense. I also am in private FB groups for particular interests, though in terms of people challenging me in a hostile way, I find that is more likely to happen in groups, as they can have all sorts of people I wouldn't choose to have as friends, some of whom are spoiling for a fight, and would rather do this with a stranger in a group than with their friends.
I imagine often conflict in groups can be about identity issues. For instance, people can get very angry because someone says something critical of a book or author that they love, which I imagine is because the book, or liking the books, is part of their identity. So they see another person's different taste as suggesting they are inferior, maybe. And maybe some people are suggesting this, because many people do express their views in a very didactic, black and white way, in a tone to suggest that they have some superior taste or intellect that is enabling them to present the ultimate perspective.
I wonder how different identity is (or even if it exists at all in any way we would recognise) in cultures which are not binary in thinking as we are in the west.
It says that we don't like television- and people know that we don't like it. They also know that we prefer live stage to film - live stage has demands that film does not and we enjoy seeing how producers and actors cope with those demands. Other than that, I have some problem understanding your post.
We are probably seeing things very differently. I have trouble understanding how the simple fact of not liking something could be a part of a sense of identity. To me it is simply a practical thing, and would only attain identity-type meaning if it were being used as a symbol for something bigger and more significant about the person.
As an example, I don't eat pork, because I don't like it. I don't like the taste or texture (though I do like and eat sausages and bacon). This is not part of how I define myself - it's simply practical self-knowledge that guides my choices in the supermarket. However, for some of my Muslim friends, not eating pork is part of their cultural and religious identity. And for some of my vegan friends, not eating meat is part of a moral and ethical identity. It symbolises more - a bigger aspect of themselves that they see as part of who they are.
I think the identity definition comes at the point where like/dislike topples into Taste (as in something meeting some criterion for good or bad).
Years ago friends of ours would have Themed Dinners - Spanish, Venetian, Black & White, Literary, that sort of thing. I suggested a Bad Taste Dinner, but it never got widespread support. People were afraid their idea of bad taste would be someone else's cherished ideal - with resultant huffiness.
Good Taste (and who gets to say what that is) is very much a signifier of class/status/identity.
I also do not have a tv, and when I was growing up I think it was somewhat a matter of identity. For one thing, we as kids were people who missed out on pop culture. For another our parents were people who had "better" quality tastes than that. Nowadays when I do want to watch The Expanse or something else, I scarcely need a TV to do it.
I see this with people who say they don't use ereaders - often it seems part of a self-definition of being old-fashioned and liking 'real' things, sometimes with a kind of suggestion that they have superior taste.
I don't use e-readers because I like the tactile feel of a book. I like the muscle memory and background sense of knowing how far through the book I am. I don't get any of that from an electronic copy.
Mrs C uses e-readers. She mostly agrees about the feel of a physical book, but values the light weight handlability of the e-reader more, plus the fact that it glows, so she can read in bed without the light on.
It's just a preference.
I wouldn't say that I was old-fashioned at all, but I would say that I don't automatically adopt new things just because they're new - I'll adopt them iff I see a significant benefit for my life. Newer isn't necessarily better - it depends on what your needs are. I didn't have a cellphone until more than a decade after pretty much everyone else I know had one - not because I was trying to cultivate an old-fashioned persona or anything, but because at that point in my life I had no real need for one.
I think the identity definition comes at the point where like/dislike topples into Taste (as in something meeting some criterion for good or bad).
Ah, that is interesting and is making sense to me. Maybe this is why I don't experience this sense of identity, because I somehow don't make this switch from like/dislike into taste and how taste supposedly defines me. At least, not consciously. I am aware of all sorts of categories (often conflicting) that society would place me in, based on income, lifestyle, hobbies, preferences, etc., but they are so contradictory that they mean nothing to me.
And @Leorning Cniht, yes, I said 'often.' I am aware it's not the same for everyone. I was talking about a pattern of when people do use personal preference to construct a sense of self, a certain 'type' of person they see themselves as, or want to be. I gave this example, because I come across many discussions about ereaders versus paper books in reading groups on FB, and I see these patterns there.
I think the identity definition comes at the point where like/dislike topples into Taste (as in something meeting some criterion for good or bad).
Ah, that is interesting and is making sense to me. Maybe this is why I don't experience this sense of identity, because I somehow don't make this switch from like/dislike into taste and how taste supposedly defines me. At least, not consciously. I am aware of all sorts of categories (often conflicting) that society would place me in, based on income, lifestyle, hobbies, preferences, etc., but they are so contradictory that they mean nothing to me.
And @Leorning Cniht, yes, I said 'often.' I am aware it's not the same for everyone. I was talking about a pattern of when people do use personal preference to construct a sense of self, a certain 'type' of person they see themselves as, or want to be. I gave this example, because I come across many discussions about ereaders versus paper books in reading groups on FB, and I see these patterns there.
Before I began working in lifestyle media, this notion of criteria governing Good or Bad Taste didn't impinge on my daily consciousness at all. It seemed trivial and slightly ridiculous. Taste (sophistication, style, aesthetic appeal) though is a major factor in the fashion industry, in the purchase of modern art, in wine-tasting or restaurant reviews and in architecture and interior design. Lifestyle media and those 'experts' influencing and advising consumers what to wear or invest in or where to eat play on individual insecurities and naivety. It's very calculated bid to confer status and inner-circle belonging on certain consumers and a seductive labyrinth for those wanting to work in these industries (anyone who has seen The Devil Wears Prada and the iconic version of Anna Wintour will notice that autocratic judgment) with very little social conscience or idea of what is 'good' or fitting.
Popular culture and visual spectacle dictate notions of beauty, taste, desirability, or topicality that are often internalised without any interrogation of what those qualities or attributes mean in terms of class or culture or artistic legitimacy. I have often felt that when shopping or travelling, there's a loss of identity in that I don't know what I'm doing or looking at, what or who I'm emulating or wanting to impress or please (buying gifts for others is an example of feeling clueless and a failure). So much choice and so little to choose between products or leisure activities because none of this seems necessary.
If I had more disposable income, I'd buy differently because my taste threshhold is determined by what I can afford. Is the decision to buy this rather than that my own subjective feeling or a desire fostered by what others are presented as wanting?
'Twas ever thus. I cast a certain cynical eye on the recent rise of Vegan food lines in major retailers, and this week I read recycled dresses are the latest fashion.
I don't doubt the apocalypse will be monetised.
Since Fat Old Women are not a target demographic for many, I am insulated from most advertising (though I noticed they are trying to sell me Cremation Plans and the odd cruise). However I notice tech products are very much pitched as Must Have to be au courant . Also gendered - the man uses his state-of-the-art smartphone to look at spreadsheets, the woman to take selfies.
Do you find that knowing that you resemble your great-grandmother, and wondering whether she would have had a life like yours given your circumstances alters your self-image?
I can't speak for Firenze, but I do. I've been haunted by my family past all my life, to the extent that I probably know too much and am too aware of it, and it does lead to terrible confusion and guilt.
On my dad's side, everyone going back to the 15th century has lived in the same valley, farmed, voted Tory (for as long as they had the vote) and that's about it. On my mum's side, we've got 1 tap between 50 houses, people dying down mines, going to prison for illegal union organising in the 1860s, the birth of the Labour party, etc.
Being an inquisitive child, I was always very confused between my two sets of grandparents, who loved me and my brother very much - one set living in a terraced house, reading the Daily Mirror, and voting Labour, and the others reading the Daily Express in their farmhouse and sinking end of day Martinis like they were going out of fashion (it was the 1980s).
My two earliest memories are of being on the picket lines in the miner's strike (not sure what my mum was thinking as it was no place for a three year old) in 1984 with one side of the family, then having my other grandmother the same year thank Mrs Thatcher (in person) for saving the country...
I've got no idea who I am - by inclination I'm a deeply middle class shire Tory (though I tend to have voted Green or Liberal politically), but there's another part of me that's all Marxist Firebrand, self-help, non-conformist, up the Durham Miners...
I can see all those influences in me, but sometimes my own head feels like it's at war with itself. I'm haunted perpetually by disloyalty to one side or the other; feel like an imposter whether in a Working Man's Club or a St James's club (both of which do come up as a member of both); and spend far too much time worrying about whether a long dead great grandfather would have made more of the cards I've been dealt than I have had he not been killed in a colliery explosion at 36 leaving a widow and 7 children (and if he'd had the chance to do any schooling past 12).
And @Leorning Cniht, yes, I said 'often.' I am aware it's not the same for everyone. I was talking about a pattern of when people do use personal preference to construct a sense of self, a certain 'type' of person they see themselves as, or want to be. I gave this example, because I come across many discussions about ereaders versus paper books in reading groups on FB, and I see these patterns there.
I wonder if part of this is driven by external pressure to not like whatever it is that you like? If you're told - by other people, society, whoever - that your preferences are bad or wrong, perhaps this drives you to double down on them and incorporate them in an identity?
Do you find that knowing that you resemble your great-grandmother, and wondering whether she would have had a life like yours given your circumstances alters your self-image?
I can't speak for Firenze, but I do. I've been haunted by my family past all my life, to the extent that I probably know too much and am too aware of it, and it does lead to terrible confusion and guilt.
On my dad's side, everyone going back to the 15th century has lived in the same valley, farmed, voted Tory (for as long as they had the vote) and that's about it. On my mum's side, we've got 1 tap between 50 houses, people dying down mines, going to prison for illegal union organising in the 1860s, the birth of the Labour party, etc.
Being an inquisitive child, I was always very confused between my two sets of grandparents, who loved me and my brother very much - one set living in a terraced house, reading the Daily Mirror, and voting Labour, and the others reading the Daily Express in their farmhouse and sinking end of day Martinis like they were going out of fashion (it was the 1980s).
My two earliest memories are of being on the picket lines in the miner's strike (not sure what my mum was thinking as it was no place for a three year old) in 1984 with one side of the family, then having my other grandmother the same year thank Mrs Thatcher (in person) for saving the country...
I've got no idea who I am - by inclination I'm a deeply middle class shire Tory (though I tend to have voted Green or Liberal politically), but there's another part of me that's all Marxist Firebrand, self-help, non-conformist, up the Durham Miners...
I can see all those influences in me, but sometimes my own head feels like it's at war with itself. I'm haunted perpetually by disloyalty to one side or the other; feel like an imposter whether in a Working Man's Club or a St James's club (both of which do come up as a member of both); and spend far too much time worrying about whether a long dead great grandfather would have made more of the cards I've been dealt than I have had he not been killed in a colliery explosion at 36 leaving a widow and 7 children (and if he'd had the chance to do any schooling past 12).
It gets to you, well, it gets to me.
So much of this resonates for me @betjemaniac. Wow.
This recent Guardian article on what would probably now be seen as unethical practices in the private fertility clinics of the 60s and 70s, seems relevant to this thread. The last paragraph chimes more strongly with how I feel about genetic inheritance, I guess - though there have been times when *not* being related to one parent would have 'explained' more to me, than did the truth. I expect many people feel like that, my own kids perhaps included.
I find ID issues puzzling. From experience I know pride and vanity come pre-equipped with their own punishment. But in seeking humility - which properly understood, I believe to be a form of self-love as well as (because it's ?) a 'good thing to do' - it sometimes feels as if it's necessary to kind-of annihilate, or at least detach from, the idea of 'self'. The older I get, the less of a problem this seems to be, though it's still very difficult - and the more jarring become the presentations of 'self' in film, TV, the news etc where people seem to be moving in entirely the opposite direction.
The most I can so far claim for this, personally, is that it seems likely to be at least helpful in preparation for death
(On reflection - a degree of selflessness has been useful in bringing up small kids, and preserving a marriage. So once again my deep thought collapses to obvious conclusions ).
Do you find that knowing that you resemble your great-grandmother, and wondering whether she would have had a life like yours given your circumstances alters your self-image?
I can't speak for Firenze, but I do. I've been haunted by my family past all my life, to the extent that I probably know too much and am too aware of it, and it does lead to terrible confusion and guilt.
On my dad's side, everyone going back to the 15th century has lived in the same valley, farmed, voted Tory (for as long as they had the vote) and that's about it. On my mum's side, we've got 1 tap between 50 houses, people dying down mines, going to prison for illegal union organising in the 1860s, the birth of the Labour party, etc.
Being an inquisitive child, I was always very confused between my two sets of grandparents, who loved me and my brother very much - one set living in a terraced house, reading the Daily Mirror, and voting Labour, and the others reading the Daily Express in their farmhouse and sinking end of day Martinis like they were going out of fashion (it was the 1980s).
My two earliest memories are of being on the picket lines in the miner's strike (not sure what my mum was thinking as it was no place for a three year old) in 1984 with one side of the family, then having my other grandmother the same year thank Mrs Thatcher (in person) for saving the country...
I've got no idea who I am - by inclination I'm a deeply middle class shire Tory (though I tend to have voted Green or Liberal politically), but there's another part of me that's all Marxist Firebrand, self-help, non-conformist, up the Durham Miners...
I can see all those influences in me, but sometimes my own head feels like it's at war with itself. I'm haunted perpetually by disloyalty to one side or the other; feel like an imposter whether in a Working Man's Club or a St James's club (both of which do come up as a member of both); and spend far too much time worrying about whether a long dead great grandfather would have made more of the cards I've been dealt than I have had he not been killed in a colliery explosion at 36 leaving a widow and 7 children (and if he'd had the chance to do any schooling past 12).
It gets to you, well, it gets to me.
So much of this resonates for me @betjemaniac. Wow.
Some of my forebears were cleared off their crofts during the Highland Clearances; an injustice which resonated down the years, eventually being passed on to me. They were cleared in 1813 and 1815, and the Crofters War of the 1880s kept the stories alive. My grandmother knew her great uncle who was politically active in the 1880s; he knew the generation that were cleared. I am four degrees of separation from the victims of the 1813 and 1815 clearances.
My immediate ancestors remained in Scotland, but many of their siblings, in each generation, left - to Canada, to America, to New Zealand, to Australia.
It shapes how I feel about immigration - the experiences of immigrants into this country, mirror the experiences of my family leaving this country. Their experience coming here, is my families experience of going there. They now are us then.
@betjemaniac, @BroJames reflecting on what is inescapable or irreconcilable in family legacies. I sometimes think of my background (formative influences and genealogies) as a cobbled-together patchwork but for years I tried to find some means of integrating them.
These days I'm inclined to think of them as a jarring collection of disparate, even antagonistic, family histories, faiths (Presbyterian Sunday School, Catholic missionary schooling) places and cultures with myself as a chameleon treading warily in the middle.
@betjemaniac, @BroJames reflecting on what is inescapable or irreconcilable in family legacies. I sometimes think of my background (formative influences and genealogies) as a cobbled-together patchwork but for years I tried to find some means of integrating them.
These days I'm inclined to think of them as a jarring collection of disparate, even antagonistic, family histories, faiths (Presbyterian Sunday School, Catholic missionary schooling) places and cultures with myself as a chameleon treading warily in the middle.
Yes I suspect that's the way it has to work. When you said it rang a lot of bells for you it occurred to me that I'd missed out the one diversion away from the valley on my dad's side. When everyone else's families were going to Canada, NZ, etc, mine chose Rhodesia...*
*although that's quite in character, as I can't remember who said it but in the 50s and 60s it was basically 'the Daily Express with borders'...
*although that's quite in character, as I can't remember who said it but in the 50s and 60s it was basically 'the Daily Express with borders'...
That made me laugh, and I went googling for Express columnists with whom to compare Ian Smith. But the first hit was Richard and Judy, who it is hard to imagine announcing UDI
Ironically, my family's experiences don't seem to have made much difference - I'm pretty relaxed about who people are and what they say as long as they aren't too twattish*, I suspect my sister is much the same as she just crashes through life handling everything that comes her way in a fashion that I deeply envy. Though her in-laws do apparently own half of Kenya, so who knows?
Meanwhile my brother is like Tommy Robinson with all the love squeezed out - hates immigrants (obviously there are thousands of them hiding in the Essex village he lives in that I can't see, this is the sort of place where for years the local ethnic population was Gerry, who liked his Guinness), hates Labour, hates anyone who has different views to him, in fact, hates anything with a hooked beak, knows better than everyone else, and shows how successful he is in life by living in his Mum's spare bedroom at 47.
*I would file this sort of behaviour under "too twattish"
*although that's quite in character, as I can't remember who said it but in the 50s and 60s it was basically 'the Daily Express with borders'...
That made me laugh, and I went googling for Express columnists with whom to compare Ian Smith. But the first hit was Richard and Judy, who it is hard to imagine announcing UDI
My family's take on Ian Smith (and to their credit they left after UDI) was that they quite liked him, it was everyone else in the government they objected to, especially PK van der Byl
*although that's quite in character, as I can't remember who said it but in the 50s and 60s it was basically 'the Daily Express with borders'...
That made me laugh, and I went googling for Express columnists with whom to compare Ian Smith. But the first hit was Richard and Judy, who it is hard to imagine announcing UDI
to be scrupulously fair, the Express of today and the Express of the 50s and 60s are very different papers. The Daily Express of the past was (while Conservative, conservative, and proudly middlebrow) was at the time genuinely innovative
*although that's quite in character, as I can't remember who said it but in the 50s and 60s it was basically 'the Daily Express with borders'...
That made me laugh, and I went googling for Express columnists with whom to compare Ian Smith. But the first hit was Richard and Judy, who it is hard to imagine announcing UDI
well if you got the same google search results for 'Daily Express Columnists' I did I suspect one down from them might fit the bill...
Jolly old racist Rhodesia. For many Brits who moved there, I suspect it was a pleasant expat sojourn that ended when they came back Home to the UK and could go on waxing nostalgic about the sundowners and wild animals and underpaid Black servants.
Nostalgia is perhaps the most duplicitous of emotions. I don't know how many times someone has talked about feeling fond of their old boarding school only to reveal that it was in reality a traumatic period of adolescent life with bullying and ritual humiliations by teachers.
Jolly old racist Rhodesia. For many Brits who moved there, I suspect it was a pleasant expat sojourn that ended when they came back Home to the UK and could go on waxing nostalgic about the sundowners and wild animals and underpaid Black servants.
Nostalgia is perhaps the most duplicitous of emotions. I don't know how many times someone has talked about feeling fond of their old boarding school only to reveal that it was in reality a traumatic period of adolescent life with bullying and ritual humiliations by teachers.
To continue both tangents, I have never met any men quite as damaged as 1950s-1990s products of Peterhouse (Zimbabwe for the wider readership).
On your first point, I think it depends when they came 'Home' (and not, funnily enough when they went out there, because I don't think generations comes into it IME) - the ones that came back at/before 1965 might fit your description to an extent, but there's (as I guess you know) a much harder, bitterer edge to the post 1965 whenwes. In some cases that manifests itself in the psyche of their children, even those born in post 1980 Zimbabwe.
@betjemaniac I know what you're talking about and that undiagnosed and untreated war-related PTSD has played a destructive and misunderstood role both in recent Zimbabwean history and the lives of those who left after 1980 following the bush war or second Chimurenga. That touches a very raw nerve.
Bringing this back to the issues of identity and place, I wonder about many of those who grew up in societies or cultures that no longer exist as such. Obviously, post-colonial Africa and places like Kenya or Namibia, but also former working-class communities in London now gentrified beyond recognition (thinking of Iain Sinclair's Hackney: That Rose-Red Empire and his attempt to recuperate the psychogeography of a vanishing city. The shabby segregated Cape Town I came to in the 1980s as a student bears little resemblance to the metropolis or playground for wealth tourists now.
Where they damaged by the absorption of that toxic racist ideology ? (Also what/is/was Peterhouse in this context.)
Peterhouse is a boarding school in Zimbabwe, which is (from my experience of its products and their memories) at best a sort of turbocharged Gordonstoun, and at worst makes If... look like a sanitised documentary.
Out of deference to MaryLouise I won't go into the other question, except that it's much, much more complicated than that.
Bringing this back to the issues of identity and place, I wonder about many of those who grew up in societies or cultures that no longer exist as such. Obviously, post-colonial Africa and places like Kenya or Namibia, but also former working-class communities in London now gentrified beyond recognition (thinking of Iain Sinclair's Hackney: That Rose-Red Empire and his attempt to recuperate the psychogeography of a vanishing city. The shabby segregated Cape Town I came to in the 1980s as a student bears little resemblance to the metropolis or playground for wealth tourists now.
I think class comes into it a lot - the clearances of the East End (whether forcible or through gentrification) led to the destruction of a culture and way of life. On the other hand, the places they were cleared to (at least in the slum clearance wave) - Stevenage, Harlow, etc, developed new working class cultures that were neither what had gone before nor what the other working class areas round them had - so (at best, and I'm clutching slightly at silver linings here) it was creative destruction.
Namibia I don't know much about, but I did once sketch out a potential PhD thesis on the comparative decolonisation experience of Kenya and Zimbabwe and the role of social class - I'll spare you all the 100,000 words on what I think was going on there!
Where they damaged by the absorption of that toxic racist ideology ? (Also what/is/was Peterhouse in this context.)
Peterhouse is a boarding school in Zimbabwe, which is (from my experience of its products and their memories) at best a sort of turbocharged Gordonstoun, and at worst makes If... look like a sanitised documentary.
Out of deference to MaryLouise I won't go into the other question, except that it's much, much more complicated than that.
Thanks for the explanation bejemaniac, I really don't know much more than the basics about the area - I have studied decolonisation but mostly of places in Asia, and I really wasn't sure what you were referring to.
@Doublethink Peterhouse was notorious but certainly not the only private school in Rhodesia and then Zimbabwe to leave a troubled legacy. From a Black perspective, here's Oxford historian Simukai Chigudu on his school days at the elite St George's College in Harare with its brutal corporal punishment, bullying and sadism.
Comments
I've adapted to technology - heck, I even had a career in IT. But a bit of me sees me as a post-apocalyptic crone making bannocks over an open fire on a repurposed hubcap.
There have been a few very sad cases here concerning the proper burial place, with disputing parties resorting to the white justice system. One such case was determined late last year in the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, a dispute between the mother of a 15 year old youth and his aunt. His mother was going through some hard times and gave her then infant son to her sister to care for. They were of the Tiwi people. The young fellow died, and his aunt arranged for a Christian church service, with a Tiwi burial in Darwin. The mother wanted the funeral to happen on Tiwi Island, with the necessary Tiwi service at the burial and another at the next Dry Season. Ultimately, the trial court and then on the appeal, found in favour of the aunt. (see Puruntatameri v Baird [2020] NTCA 12).
There was another case earlier this year in NSW. The deceased in this case was an adult and the question was whether he was to be buried in accordance with his sister's wishes on Weilwan land at Gulargambone, or on Gumbaynggirr land near Bowraville. Both are within NSW but the road journey between them is about 750 km. For 15 or more years, the deceased had lived with his partner at Bowraville, and they'd had 4 children together. Evidence at the hearing from a Gumbaynggirr elder was that:
“A person who is adopted into Gumbaynggirr society can be buried in Gumbaynggirr country. We would want a person who was Gumbaynggirr to be buried on Gumbaynggirr country, including if they are adopted by the tribe. If I went to someone else’s country to marry, I would be expected to follow their law and custom. The Deceased followed our customs, so it is right that he should be buried in Bowraville.”
“If the old spirits of this country had not wanted him to be here they would have moved him. They would have given him an uncomfortable feeling so that he would not have felt right here. I have felt this feeling myself outside my country – that I have to go home. The Deceased was at home in Gumbaynggirr country”.
The court ruled in favour of the partner rather than the sister (see Darcy v Duckett [2016] NSWSC 1756)
Both very sad cases and there are more in the same vein.
During the Covid lockdown though it has become an important way to stay in touch with people I no longer see at church or who can't travel. Last week a friend called and asked me to go around and taste some home-made cheeses for her because she has had Long-Covid and after five months still has no sense of smell or taste. This is someone who always posts upbeat and positive content, has a large Instagram following for her home-crafts and recipes.
When we met, masked and keeping a distance, I was shocked to find out how ill she has been. She has lost a great deal of weight, has poor balance, rashes and blurry vision, heart palpitations. Her small business making goats-milk cheeses has fallen apart.
How many of us have an 'as-if' persona online or on social media? Generational differences are IMO more of a factor than location or culture. My niece in her 20s rarely gives any details about her private life but has no trouble posting endless revealing selfies -- I'd recognise her sculpted eyebrows and tattooed nipples anywhere but haven't a clue what she is reading or watching. Those of us who grew up writing letters, blogging or emailing tend to use social media to share interests or find others who like the things we do. Finding support or holding conversations is harder because of privacy concerns and yet some posters seem to find a comfortable balance. Twitter with its volatile mob mentality is another story.
Sometimes I miss waiting weeks for a handwritten long newsy letter only meant for a single recipient.
This project has a very dark history but has been one of the most healing and positive projects in South Africa. For many families, the not knowing what happened to a son, daughter, brother or sister leaves them stuck with terrible unanswered questions, imagining all kinds of unbearable scenarios and unable to move on. In recent years the search has become more urgent for those parents and grandparents determined to get resolution and an answer before they themselves die.
As Fullard pointed out: "What drives us in the Missing Persons Task Team is much more than recovering a body; it is about finding the remains of a life that mattered and handing them back to their family in a dignified, solemn and moving ceremony."
Yes, excess, but not in a vacuum - more often in comparison. It is quite a common thing for one to be so focused on details that one loses (or never develops) a sense of the big picture, particularly if one is autistic. Possibly something you've never experienced, but in that context, it is easily possible to be too focused on detail to get a sense of a whole, of a meaning or identity - not just with personal identity, but with all sorts of things.
I wish - unreasonably - that some of my friends would make more personal posts, rather than only ones about organisations or causes.
But then I tend to hide or unfollow FB 'friends' who post selfies or social activities - and they are usually the younger ones; children of long-emigrated cousins, accepted out of vague familial guilt.
So, yes, I suspect there is a whole way of expressing - creating even - your identity online. A world in which the places you've been, the food you eat, your own body, are only real once photographed and posted.
I also prefer people to post personal posts, though I get that people each use FB very differently. Some people just post memes. I observe that some people like discussion on their posts, but others don't. I quite like when people post selfies, because I like drawing portraits, so I draw people's selfies, and they find it fun when I draw them. I occasionally post selfies, but normally a silly selfie when my hair is messy or when I've got soaked by the rain. I met a FB friend recently and she said I look much younger in real life than on FB, but I hadn't been aware of making myself look older.
Whether the remark was tongue-in-cheek or not, it neatly pins an aspect of class as an identity marker.
I think it still an important determinant, though probably not so strongly in my modest and provincial life. But nevertheless I have the signifiers of a middle class person - books, original paintings on the walls of my owned home, wines with dinners cooked from Nigella or Ottolenghi, a subscription to the LRB and a membership of the National Trust. All of it a long way from the lives of a farmer's daughter and a rural policeman.
What you describe earlier doing on FB, @fineline, has to do with adapting a form of media to suit your needs or interests, if I'm reading you right, and as I was looking at this it struck me I do use more private Facebook groups for NT theological study groups, book discussion groups, rare plant enthusiasts, and amateur genealogy discussion groups, all closed to the public so I can comment without having atheist Friends quiz me or cousins ask about family history searches. As you say, when I'm posting there I'm not suppressing my identity or assuming a persona, just talking to the likeminded.
The politics of how we use social media to present ourselves as sophisticated or culturally literate or having a social conscience etc is akin to the politics of food, lifestyle choices, travel bragging, thrift campaigns or political resistance. Most of us have contradictory and hard-to-explain combinations of motives about what doing X or Y says about us. A decade ago most people in southern Africa with access to mobile phones or the Internet would be considered exceptionally privileged or well educated. That's not so much the case now is that local educational institutes, workplaces and library facilities offer free wifi and often free or subsidised mobile phones or laptops. Most of those posting on the community websites where I live post images or memes rather than having to choose between languages, though this too is changing. Young people want to join the global conversations and belong to a wider world.
One of the most popular local FB groups came about under lockdown when people began posting pics of what they were cooking and this had no snobbery value at all -- most communities in southern Africa (though not in Zimbabwe where British food cast a damper on eating patterns) are long-standing proud indigenous or post-colonial food cultures. It's a big part of my life.
I basically agree with the parts of your post that I've deleted. I've kept this section, as you use the word "damper". I know the sense in which you use it, and that is a common usage here. But in older days, damper also meant a scone-like bread, one which could be made quickly by stockmen after they'd spent the day moving cattle that bit closer to market, and were setting up camp for the night. Knowing that is part of my identity, just as not knowing it will be part of the identity of someone 40 years younger.
I do know that usage @GeeD, but thought the sense I was using it in was clear enough! What I'm addressing here is obviously separate from issues to do with food security or expropriated agricultural land, but it is something people talk about as a "legacy of stewed tea, burnt toast and cold porridge" in the former colonies of Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi. An old joke in my mother's family is that the Shona would have been much worse off under the Portuguese colonial state but at least everyone would know about peri-peri chicken and feijoada.
I like the balance of your post!
Out of curiosity, how is it part of your identity, do you think? What specifically do you see it saying about you and defining you?
I'm curious because, for me, I don't see it as an identity thing, so I am wondering how people process something they don't do or have into becoming part of their self definition. Is it a point of pride, for instance? I see this with people who say they don't use ereaders - often it seems part of a self-definition of being old-fashioned and liking 'real' things, sometimes with a kind of suggestion that they have superior taste.
What is its purpose, both psychologically and socially?
Does it only exist as a comparative thing, comparing oneself to others, to find one's place among them?
To what extent are value judgements important for people's sense of identity - as in, a simple comparison could be 'I have blonde hair, which distinguishes me from people with brown hair, red hair, black hair, etc.', but a value judgement would be 'I have blonde hair which makes me better/worse than people who have other hair colours.' I give that as a bit of a silly example, but I'm thinking about the multiple things identity can involve, including life choices, moral decisions, etc.
I'm wondering whether identity is something that gives people a sense of purpose and worth, and whether for many people a sense of being better than others is necessary to keep them ... I don't know.... confident? mentally afloat? Just because so much of what I see on social media is people comparing themselves to others in all sorts of ways, and so often simple differences are seen as value judgments. It's something I've been wondering about for years.
Ah yes, that makes sense. I also am in private FB groups for particular interests, though in terms of people challenging me in a hostile way, I find that is more likely to happen in groups, as they can have all sorts of people I wouldn't choose to have as friends, some of whom are spoiling for a fight, and would rather do this with a stranger in a group than with their friends.
I imagine often conflict in groups can be about identity issues. For instance, people can get very angry because someone says something critical of a book or author that they love, which I imagine is because the book, or liking the books, is part of their identity. So they see another person's different taste as suggesting they are inferior, maybe. And maybe some people are suggesting this, because many people do express their views in a very didactic, black and white way, in a tone to suggest that they have some superior taste or intellect that is enabling them to present the ultimate perspective.
I wonder how different identity is (or even if it exists at all in any way we would recognise) in cultures which are not binary in thinking as we are in the west.
We are probably seeing things very differently. I have trouble understanding how the simple fact of not liking something could be a part of a sense of identity. To me it is simply a practical thing, and would only attain identity-type meaning if it were being used as a symbol for something bigger and more significant about the person.
As an example, I don't eat pork, because I don't like it. I don't like the taste or texture (though I do like and eat sausages and bacon). This is not part of how I define myself - it's simply practical self-knowledge that guides my choices in the supermarket. However, for some of my Muslim friends, not eating pork is part of their cultural and religious identity. And for some of my vegan friends, not eating meat is part of a moral and ethical identity. It symbolises more - a bigger aspect of themselves that they see as part of who they are.
Years ago friends of ours would have Themed Dinners - Spanish, Venetian, Black & White, Literary, that sort of thing. I suggested a Bad Taste Dinner, but it never got widespread support. People were afraid their idea of bad taste would be someone else's cherished ideal - with resultant huffiness.
Good Taste (and who gets to say what that is) is very much a signifier of class/status/identity.
I don't use e-readers because I like the tactile feel of a book. I like the muscle memory and background sense of knowing how far through the book I am. I don't get any of that from an electronic copy.
Mrs C uses e-readers. She mostly agrees about the feel of a physical book, but values the light weight handlability of the e-reader more, plus the fact that it glows, so she can read in bed without the light on.
It's just a preference.
I wouldn't say that I was old-fashioned at all, but I would say that I don't automatically adopt new things just because they're new - I'll adopt them iff I see a significant benefit for my life. Newer isn't necessarily better - it depends on what your needs are. I didn't have a cellphone until more than a decade after pretty much everyone else I know had one - not because I was trying to cultivate an old-fashioned persona or anything, but because at that point in my life I had no real need for one.
Ah, that is interesting and is making sense to me. Maybe this is why I don't experience this sense of identity, because I somehow don't make this switch from like/dislike into taste and how taste supposedly defines me. At least, not consciously. I am aware of all sorts of categories (often conflicting) that society would place me in, based on income, lifestyle, hobbies, preferences, etc., but they are so contradictory that they mean nothing to me.
And @Leorning Cniht, yes, I said 'often.' I am aware it's not the same for everyone. I was talking about a pattern of when people do use personal preference to construct a sense of self, a certain 'type' of person they see themselves as, or want to be. I gave this example, because I come across many discussions about ereaders versus paper books in reading groups on FB, and I see these patterns there.
And I think that shows how fineline and I are being ships in the night.
Before I began working in lifestyle media, this notion of criteria governing Good or Bad Taste didn't impinge on my daily consciousness at all. It seemed trivial and slightly ridiculous. Taste (sophistication, style, aesthetic appeal) though is a major factor in the fashion industry, in the purchase of modern art, in wine-tasting or restaurant reviews and in architecture and interior design. Lifestyle media and those 'experts' influencing and advising consumers what to wear or invest in or where to eat play on individual insecurities and naivety. It's very calculated bid to confer status and inner-circle belonging on certain consumers and a seductive labyrinth for those wanting to work in these industries (anyone who has seen The Devil Wears Prada and the iconic version of Anna Wintour will notice that autocratic judgment) with very little social conscience or idea of what is 'good' or fitting.
Popular culture and visual spectacle dictate notions of beauty, taste, desirability, or topicality that are often internalised without any interrogation of what those qualities or attributes mean in terms of class or culture or artistic legitimacy. I have often felt that when shopping or travelling, there's a loss of identity in that I don't know what I'm doing or looking at, what or who I'm emulating or wanting to impress or please (buying gifts for others is an example of feeling clueless and a failure). So much choice and so little to choose between products or leisure activities because none of this seems necessary.
If I had more disposable income, I'd buy differently because my taste threshhold is determined by what I can afford. Is the decision to buy this rather than that my own subjective feeling or a desire fostered by what others are presented as wanting?
I don't doubt the apocalypse will be monetised.
Since Fat Old Women are not a target demographic for many, I am insulated from most advertising (though I noticed they are trying to sell me Cremation Plans and the odd cruise). However I notice tech products are very much pitched as Must Have to be au courant . Also gendered - the man uses his state-of-the-art smartphone to look at spreadsheets, the woman to take selfies.
I can't speak for Firenze, but I do. I've been haunted by my family past all my life, to the extent that I probably know too much and am too aware of it, and it does lead to terrible confusion and guilt.
On my dad's side, everyone going back to the 15th century has lived in the same valley, farmed, voted Tory (for as long as they had the vote) and that's about it. On my mum's side, we've got 1 tap between 50 houses, people dying down mines, going to prison for illegal union organising in the 1860s, the birth of the Labour party, etc.
Being an inquisitive child, I was always very confused between my two sets of grandparents, who loved me and my brother very much - one set living in a terraced house, reading the Daily Mirror, and voting Labour, and the others reading the Daily Express in their farmhouse and sinking end of day Martinis like they were going out of fashion (it was the 1980s).
My two earliest memories are of being on the picket lines in the miner's strike (not sure what my mum was thinking as it was no place for a three year old) in 1984 with one side of the family, then having my other grandmother the same year thank Mrs Thatcher (in person) for saving the country...
I've got no idea who I am - by inclination I'm a deeply middle class shire Tory (though I tend to have voted Green or Liberal politically), but there's another part of me that's all Marxist Firebrand, self-help, non-conformist, up the Durham Miners...
I can see all those influences in me, but sometimes my own head feels like it's at war with itself. I'm haunted perpetually by disloyalty to one side or the other; feel like an imposter whether in a Working Man's Club or a St James's club (both of which do come up as a member of both); and spend far too much time worrying about whether a long dead great grandfather would have made more of the cards I've been dealt than I have had he not been killed in a colliery explosion at 36 leaving a widow and 7 children (and if he'd had the chance to do any schooling past 12).
It gets to you, well, it gets to me.
I wonder if part of this is driven by external pressure to not like whatever it is that you like? If you're told - by other people, society, whoever - that your preferences are bad or wrong, perhaps this drives you to double down on them and incorporate them in an identity?
So much of this resonates for me @betjemaniac. Wow.
I find ID issues puzzling. From experience I know pride and vanity come pre-equipped with their own punishment. But in seeking humility - which properly understood, I believe to be a form of self-love as well as (because it's ?) a 'good thing to do' - it sometimes feels as if it's necessary to kind-of annihilate, or at least detach from, the idea of 'self'. The older I get, the less of a problem this seems to be, though it's still very difficult - and the more jarring become the presentations of 'self' in film, TV, the news etc where people seem to be moving in entirely the opposite direction.
The most I can so far claim for this, personally, is that it seems likely to be at least helpful in preparation for death
It makes me think of A.E. Housman’s The Welsh Marches.
Some of my forebears were cleared off their crofts during the Highland Clearances; an injustice which resonated down the years, eventually being passed on to me. They were cleared in 1813 and 1815, and the Crofters War of the 1880s kept the stories alive. My grandmother knew her great uncle who was politically active in the 1880s; he knew the generation that were cleared. I am four degrees of separation from the victims of the 1813 and 1815 clearances.
My immediate ancestors remained in Scotland, but many of their siblings, in each generation, left - to Canada, to America, to New Zealand, to Australia.
It shapes how I feel about immigration - the experiences of immigrants into this country, mirror the experiences of my family leaving this country. Their experience coming here, is my families experience of going there. They now are us then.
These days I'm inclined to think of them as a jarring collection of disparate, even antagonistic, family histories, faiths (Presbyterian Sunday School, Catholic missionary schooling) places and cultures with myself as a chameleon treading warily in the middle.
Yes I suspect that's the way it has to work. When you said it rang a lot of bells for you it occurred to me that I'd missed out the one diversion away from the valley on my dad's side. When everyone else's families were going to Canada, NZ, etc, mine chose Rhodesia...*
*although that's quite in character, as I can't remember who said it but in the 50s and 60s it was basically 'the Daily Express with borders'...
That made me laugh, and I went googling for Express columnists with whom to compare Ian Smith. But the first hit was Richard and Judy, who it is hard to imagine announcing UDI
Meanwhile my brother is like Tommy Robinson with all the love squeezed out - hates immigrants (obviously there are thousands of them hiding in the Essex village he lives in that I can't see, this is the sort of place where for years the local ethnic population was Gerry, who liked his Guinness), hates Labour, hates anyone who has different views to him, in fact, hates anything with a hooked beak, knows better than everyone else, and shows how successful he is in life by living in his Mum's spare bedroom at 47.
*I would file this sort of behaviour under "too twattish"
My family's take on Ian Smith (and to their credit they left after UDI) was that they quite liked him, it was everyone else in the government they objected to, especially PK van der Byl
to be scrupulously fair, the Express of today and the Express of the 50s and 60s are very different papers. The Daily Express of the past was (while Conservative, conservative, and proudly middlebrow) was at the time genuinely innovative
well if you got the same google search results for 'Daily Express Columnists' I did I suspect one down from them might fit the bill...
Nostalgia is perhaps the most duplicitous of emotions. I don't know how many times someone has talked about feeling fond of their old boarding school only to reveal that it was in reality a traumatic period of adolescent life with bullying and ritual humiliations by teachers.
To continue both tangents, I have never met any men quite as damaged as 1950s-1990s products of Peterhouse (Zimbabwe for the wider readership).
On your first point, I think it depends when they came 'Home' (and not, funnily enough when they went out there, because I don't think generations comes into it IME) - the ones that came back at/before 1965 might fit your description to an extent, but there's (as I guess you know) a much harder, bitterer edge to the post 1965 whenwes. In some cases that manifests itself in the psyche of their children, even those born in post 1980 Zimbabwe.
Bringing this back to the issues of identity and place, I wonder about many of those who grew up in societies or cultures that no longer exist as such. Obviously, post-colonial Africa and places like Kenya or Namibia, but also former working-class communities in London now gentrified beyond recognition (thinking of Iain Sinclair's Hackney: That Rose-Red Empire and his attempt to recuperate the psychogeography of a vanishing city. The shabby segregated Cape Town I came to in the 1980s as a student bears little resemblance to the metropolis or playground for wealth tourists now.
Peterhouse is a boarding school in Zimbabwe, which is (from my experience of its products and their memories) at best a sort of turbocharged Gordonstoun, and at worst makes If... look like a sanitised documentary.
Out of deference to MaryLouise I won't go into the other question, except that it's much, much more complicated than that.
I think class comes into it a lot - the clearances of the East End (whether forcible or through gentrification) led to the destruction of a culture and way of life. On the other hand, the places they were cleared to (at least in the slum clearance wave) - Stevenage, Harlow, etc, developed new working class cultures that were neither what had gone before nor what the other working class areas round them had - so (at best, and I'm clutching slightly at silver linings here) it was creative destruction.
Namibia I don't know much about, but I did once sketch out a potential PhD thesis on the comparative decolonisation experience of Kenya and Zimbabwe and the role of social class - I'll spare you all the 100,000 words on what I think was going on there!
Thanks for the explanation bejemaniac, I really don't know much more than the basics about the area - I have studied decolonisation but mostly of places in Asia, and I really wasn't sure what you were referring to.